Were Australians fighting an 'other people's war' in Vietnam?

One of the reasons given by Prime Minister Menzies in committing Australian combat troops to Vietnam was that we would thereby be fulfilling a commitment not to Vietnam, but to the United States, which needed support for its involvement in the war.

This can be seen in the advice given to the Australian government by its Ambassador to Washington:

'Our objective should be ... to achieve such an habitual closeness of relations with the United States and sense of mutual alliance that in our time and need, after we have shown all reasonable restraint and good sense, the United States would have little option but to respond as we would want.''The problem of Vietnam is one, it seems, where we could ... pick up a lot of credit with the United States, for this problem is one to which the United States is deeply committed and in which it genuinely feels it is carrying too much of the load, not so much the physical load the bulk of which the United States is prepared to bear, as the moral load.'

It is also true that there were some people who opposed the war from the start and believed that it was of no concern to Australia. Opposition Leader Arthur Calwell represented this view right from the start of Australia's involvement:

'We do not think it is a wise decision. We do not think it is a timely decision. We do not think it will help the fight against Communism. On the contrary, we believe it will harm that fight in the long term. We do not believe it will promote the welfare of the people of Vietnam. On the contrary, we believe it will prolong and deepen the suffering of that unhappy people so that Australia's very name may become a term of reproach among them. We do not believe that it represents a wise or even intelligent response to the challenge of Chinese power. On the contrary, we believe it mistakes entirely the nature of that power, and that it materially assists China in her subversive aims. Indeed, we cannot conceive a decision by the Government more likely to promote the long term interests of China in Asia and the Pacific.'

1966 Election campaign poster, Liberal Party of Australia

However, many people genuinely believed that our involvement in the war was necessary because the war in Vietnam did affect Australia directly - it was our war. This can be seen in, for example, the Prime Minister's speech committing Australians, and in the attitude of some of the soldiers involved:

'There can be no doubt of the gravity of the situation in South Vietnam. There is ample evidence to show that with the support of the North Vietnamese regime and other Communist powers, the Viet Cong has been preparing on a more substantial scale than ... (before) insurgency action designed to destroy South Vietnamese government control, and to disrupt by violence the life of the local people ... The takeover of South Vietnam would be a direct military threat to Australia and all the countries of South and South-East Asia. It must be seen as part of a thrust by Communist China between the Indian and Pacific Oceans.''Behind Vietnam lies a wider conflict that extends from the northern frontiers of India to the dividing line in Korea; that engages the world wide diplomacy of the United States; and that casts a shadow of fear over millions of people in all lands of southern Asia no less than the shadow of terror over the villagers of the Mekong delta. This is a war that affects the fate of all countries of South-east Asia -- a war that throws into sharp relief the aim of Communist China to dominate them by force.'

(Menzies Government Minister Hasluck, 1966)

'I subscribe to the domino theory ... because I believe it obvious ... that if the Vietnam War ends with some compromise that denies South Vietnam a real and protected independence, Laos and Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia will be vulnerable ... this domino theory ... has formidable reality to Australians who see the boundaries of aggressive communism coming closer and closer.'

(Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies)

Were National Servicemen conscripted and sent to Vietnam against their will?

About 40% of all troops who served in Vietnam were National Servicemen. All were, by definition, conscripted into the Army.

But there were probably few, if any, who were actually forced to go to Vietnam.

Demonstration at Central Railway Station in Sydney in September 1965 as national servicemen left for training at Kapooka, NSW.(Photo from Fairfax Photo Library - MacGladrie; as reproduced in Peter Edwards, A Nation at War, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1997)

After their initial training all recruits were allocated to a Corps (branch of the Army, eg Infantry, Artillery) for specialised training, and were then sent to particular units. If the unit was scheduled to be sent to Vietnam, the soldiers were generally given the chance to avoid transfer elsewhere. The Army's rationale was that in combat every man had to be able to rely totally on his mates, and any reluctant soldiers would endanger the whole group.

An example of this approach can be seen in the recent history of the Eighth Battalion in Vietnam, Robert A Hall's Combat Battalion, (Allen & Unwin, St Leonard's, 2000). Hall records that many National Servicemen:

'recalled that in various ways they were given the option of avoiding a tour of Vietnam. Peter Ball ... said that members of the 16th National Service intake were invited to allocate themselves to groups including those who wanted to go to Vietnam and those who didn't. Peter Cousins ... believed that every Nasho could have avoided service in Vietnam but that exercising the option might require some radical action like joining the Communist party of Australia, becoming a practising homosexual or assaulting one's own platoon commander. He volunteered for service in the infantry ... David Jones ... recalled: "We were lined up and told that if we didn't wish to go we didn't have to. I would think that 95%, apart from a few married men, wanted to go." Andrew Roberts ... (said that) "The officer taking the parade stated that if for any reason we objected or didn't want to go to Vietnam we could be exempted and each case would be considered" ... Jeffrey Sculley remembered: "There was a battalion parade about six to eight weeks before we went over and we were told if we didn't want to go (we should) report to (our) platoon commander after the parade and they would have you replaced ..."'However, other Nashos have claimed that they had no option but to go. Rod Scutter ... tried to avoid going but he went anyway. Derek Walsh ... was given a range of options but he thought they were loaded against the nasho ...'

Did the election of Prime Minister Whitlam in December 1972 lead to Australian troops being returned from Vietnam?

By the time the Labor Government was elected in December 1972 there were only about 120 Australian troops in Vietnam - as training officers with the Australian Army Training Team Vietnam (AATTV).

This can be seen in the advice given to the Australian government by its Ambassador to Washington:

The decision to scale back Australia's combat contribution was made in 1970, and all Australian combat troops had been returned to Australia well before December 1972.

Thousands of Brisbane residents turned out on 13 November 1970 to welcome home troops from 8RAR, the first Australian battalion to be withdrawn from Vietnam without being replaced.(Photo from Queensland Newspapers; as reproduced in Peter Edwards, A Nation at War, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1997)

Annual ANZAC Day Ceremonies

The ANZAC Day Student Service

This solemn ceremony is conducted every year in Brisbane's ANZAC Square prior to ANZAC Day from 10am and noon approximately. The 2016 event took place on Thursday, the 21st day of April, and several thousand Queensland school students took part.

The ANZAC Day Dawn Service

Every year on the 25th day of April, the ANZAC Day Dawn Service starts at 04:28am sharp at Brisbane's Shrine of Remembrance, ANZAC Square, located between Ann and Adelaide Streets. All are welcome to attend.